Off Topic Politics, life, gadgets, people... gobbledygook.

Here's an interesting article

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 06-03-2004, 06:35 PM
Jason's Avatar
Site Founder
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,623
Default

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,121731,00.html

A jury has ordered Ford Motor Co. (search) to pay nearly $369 million to a woman paralyzed in a rollover accident involving a Ford Explorer, the nation's best-selling sport-utility vehicle.
 
  #2  
Old 06-03-2004, 07:22 PM
Hot_Georgia_2004's Avatar
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 1,797
Default

I think the 369 million is excessive.
Althoug this is somewhat different, I've forgotten how much the woman won from McDonalds for spilling hot coffee on herself. Was it also millions?
 
  #3  
Old 06-03-2004, 07:32 PM
Jason's Avatar
Site Founder
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,623
Default

I think that one is zilch? Just like the "fat people" suit.
369 is excessive. Agreed. Not that I'm downplaying the importance of mobility But, my father is a doctor and here in Florida we've got the malpractice crisis with insurance companies. Try having a baby if you live in Miami. You can either drive to Georgia or swim to Cuba.
 
  #4  
Old 06-04-2004, 01:24 AM
xcel's Avatar
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 2,567
Default

Hi Jason:

___This is unadulterated rape of a domestic manufacturer’s ability to make a profit in today’s tough automobile business climate. Sure Ford could have made the track wider and lowered the center of gravity … I guess it wouldn’t be an SUV then, would it? Maybe Ford should sue the lady for purchasing an Explorer when she should have purchased a Taurus instead.

___What if the lady was in a Sequoia or 4-Runner? A Durango? A Tahoe or Trailblazer? An X5 or XC90 when she flipped over? Sue whoever at what ever cost, that is the answer … No wonder all of our jobs and markets are headed over seas.

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Hunt Club Farms Landscaping Ltd.
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net
 
  #5  
Old 08-04-2004, 04:36 PM
lakedude's Avatar
Super Moderator & Contributor ($)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,672
Default

I'm split down the middle on this one. Part of me thinks well duh, a tall vehicle is gonna tip before a low riding one will and if you are worried about tipping over buy a car not an SUV.

The other part hopes that the car makers get 1000 more of these lawsuits and put out a 4x4 that isn't jacked up. Almost no one takes their fancy SUV's off road so why do they need to be jacked up? I've got a Ford 4x4 pickup that is all bouncy-jouncy cause it has a factory "lift kit". I have no use for the extra hight but you can't buy a 4x4 from Ford without a stinkin lift kit! Why can I not buy a 4x4 that is the same height as the 2wd version?
 
Related Topics
Thread
Topic Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Atomic Frog
Journalism & The Media
3
09-11-2005 01:04 AM
Delta Flyer
Off Topic
2
07-30-2005 11:35 AM
GreenAndBlue
Fuel Economy & Emissions
1
04-25-2005 07:10 PM
peggy
Fuel Economy & Emissions
4
09-11-2004 03:21 PM



Quick Reply: Here's an interesting article


Contact Us -

  • Manage Preferences
  • Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

    When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

    © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands


    All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:21 PM.